Denne siden ble automatisk oversatt og nøyaktigheten av oversettelsen er ikke garantert. Vennligst referer til engelsk versjon for en kildetekst.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Underwater Versus Conventional Preventive Coagulation for Intraprocedural Vessel Management During Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM)

8. mai 2026 oppdatert av: Mohan Ramchandani, Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, India

Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) has become an established, minimally invasive therapy for achalasia and esophageal motility disorders. Submucosal tunnelling is a critical phase of POEM and requires meticulous haemostasis to avoid bleeding, loss of orientation, reduced visibility, and prolonged procedural time.

The current standard method of vessel coagulation during POEM involves conventional coagulation under CO₂ insufflation using the hybrid knife (HK). However, this approach can require additional hemostatic devices-most commonly coagulation forceps-particularly when dealing with large-calibre vessels or resistant bleeding.

A novel technique-underwater preventive coagulation-leverages water as a conductive medium. Preliminary evidence suggests that:

  • electrosurgical current in water is focalized at the interface of the vessel,
  • allowing a soft sealing of the vessel wall,
  • reducing the risk of vessel rupture or unintended deep thermal injury,
  • and potentially eliminating the need to convert to coagulation forceps. Pilot data from our center demonstrate that underwater prophylactic sealing of large vessels during POEM is feasible, safe, and associated with markedly reduced need for rescue coagulation forceps. The technique is already used in practice but lacks systematic evidence from prospective randomized trials.

This study is designed to provide high-quality evidence on whether underwater vessel coagulation improves haemostatic efficiency, reduces intra-procedural bleeding, and minimizes device changes during POEM.

All POEM procedures will be performed under general anesthesia in the supine position using Fujifilm high-definition gastroscopes with a 2.8 mm channel and transparent distal cap.

Steps (Both Arms)

  1. Identify the esophagogastric junction (EGJ).
  2. Inject saline + methylene blue submucosally.
  3. Create a 2 cm mucosal incision at 5-6 o'clock position, 10 cm above EGJ.
  4. Enter the submucosal space.
  5. Perform submucosal tunnelling down to EGJ and 2-3 cm into cardia.

  6. Perform vessel haemostasis according to group allocation:

    • Underwater coagulation (intervention)
    • CO₂-based conventional coagulation (control)
  7. Perform circular myotomy (with occasional full-thickness myotomy when indicated).
  8. Close the mucosal entry using hemostatic clips.
  9. Record procedure time, instrument exchanges, bleeding events, and forceps usage.

Equipment

  • Hybrid Knife (Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH)
  • VIO 3 generator + ERBEJet 2 water-jet system
  • Methylene-blue tinted saline
  • Electrosurgical settings: ENDO CUT Q 2-3-3 for mucosal incision and myotomy

Studieoversikt

Status

Rekruttering

Forhold

Intervensjon / Behandling

Detaljert beskrivelse

Primary Objective

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1. Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and 2. Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation. Secondary Objectives

  1. To compare composite forceps use (rescue + prophylactic) between groups.
  2. To evaluate the frequency of prophylactic-only forceps use.
  3. To compare total number of forceps applications per procedure.
  4. To determine differences in intra-procedural bleeding episodes.
  5. To compare procedural efficiency (procedure time, number of instrument exchanges).
  6. To compare hematological and inflammatory markers (Hb drop, Hct, CRP, WBC).
  7. To compare delayed bleeding rates within 30 days.
  8. To evaluate overall complication rates (intra- and post-procedural).
  9. To assess patient-reported outcomes (pain, tolerability). A prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial.

Study Arms Intervention Arm: Underwater Coagulation

  • Vessel coagulation performed entirely underwater using the Hybrid Knife.
  • SWIFT COAG: E3 (89 W) for POEM.
  • Physiological saline instilled to completely displace air around the target vessel.

Control Arm: Conventional Coagulation (CO₂ Setting)

  • Standard vessel isolation and coagulation under CO₂ insufflation.
  • SWIFT COAG: E3 (89 W) for POEM.

Studietype

Observasjonsmessig

Registrering (Antatt)

120

Kontakter og plasseringer

Denne delen inneholder kontaktinformasjon for de som utfører studien, og informasjon om hvor denne studien blir utført.

Studiekontakt

Studer Kontakt Backup

Studiesteder

  • India
    • Telangana
      • Hyderabad, Telangana, India, 500082
        • Rekruttering
        • Asian Institute of Gastroenterology Hospital
        • Ta kontakt med:
        • Ta kontakt med:

Deltakelseskriterier

Forskere ser etter personer som passer til en bestemt beskrivelse, kalt kvalifikasjonskriterier. Noen eksempler på disse kriteriene er en persons generelle helsetilstand eller tidligere behandlinger.

Kvalifikasjonskriterier

Alder som er kvalifisert for studier

  • Voksen
  • Eldre voksen

Tar imot friske frivillige

Nei

Prøvetakingsmetode

Sannsynlighetsprøve

Studiepopulasjon

120 (60 in each arm)

Beskrivelse

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Age ≥ 18 years
  2. Diagnosis of achalasia or esophageal motility disorder planned for POEM
  3. Ability to provide informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Anticoagulant or antithrombotic therapy not safely stoppable
  2. Known coagulopathy or platelet disorder
  3. Esophageal/gastric varices
  4. Previous POEM or Heller's myotomy
  5. Prior treatment for same condition
  6. Inability or refusal to consent
  7. Visualized vessels smaller than the HK inner diameter (1.2 mm)

Studieplan

Denne delen gir detaljer om studieplanen, inkludert hvordan studien er utformet og hva studien måler.

Hvordan er studiet utformet?

Designdetaljer

Kohorter og intervensjoner

Gruppe / Kohort
Intervensjon / Behandling
Under Water Coagulation

Intervention Arm: Underwater Coagulation

  • Vessel coagulation performed entirely underwater using the Hybrid Knife.
  • SWIFT COAG: E3 (89 W) for POEM.
  • Physiological saline instilled to completely displace air around the target vessel.
Annen: Under Water Preventive Coagulation

Leverages water as a conductive medium. Preliminary evidence suggests that:

  1. electrosurgical current in water is focalized at the interface of the vessel,
  2. allowing a soft sealing of the vessel wall,
  3. reducing the risk of vessel rupture or unintended deep thermal injury,
  4. and potentially eliminating the need to convert to coagulation forceps.
Conventional Coagulation

Control Arm: Conventional Coagulation (CO₂ Setting)

  • Standard vessel isolation and coagulation under CO₂ insufflation.
  • SWIFT COAG: E3 (89 W) for POEM.

Hva måler studien?

Primære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Tiltaksbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:
Tidsramme: 60 minutes
  1. Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and
  2. Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation.
60 minutes

Sekundære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Tiltaksbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
To compare composite forceps use (rescue + prophylactic) between groups.
Tidsramme: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To evaluate the frequency of prophylactic-only forceps use.
Tidsramme: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To compare total number of forceps applications per procedure.
Tidsramme: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To determine differences in intra-procedural bleeding episodes
Tidsramme: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To compare procedural efficiency (procedure time, number of instrument exchanges
Tidsramme: 60 minutes

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
60 minutes
To compare hematological and inflammatory markers (Hb drop, Hct, CRP, WBC)
Tidsramme: 24 hours

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
24 hours
To compare delayed bleeding rates
Tidsramme: 30 days
To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
30 days
To evaluate overall complication rates (intra- and post-procedural)
Tidsramme: 24 hours

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
24 hours
To assess patient-reported outcomes (pain, tolerability).
Tidsramme: 72 hours

To compare the proportion of POEM patients requiring rescue haemostasis with coagulation forceps (for active bleeding) between:

1.Underwater preventive vessel coagulation, and Conventional vessel coagulation under CO₂ insufflation
72 hours

Samarbeidspartnere og etterforskere

Det er her du vil finne personer og organisasjoner som er involvert i denne studien.

Sponsor

Asian Institute of Gastroenterology, India

Etterforskere

  • Studieleder: Mohan Dr Ramchandani, MD DM, Asian Institute of Gastroenterology

Studierekorddatoer

Disse datoene sporer fremdriften for innsending av studieposter og sammendragsresultater til ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieposter og rapporterte resultater gjennomgås av National Library of Medicine (NLM) for å sikre at de oppfyller spesifikke kvalitetskontrollstandarder før de legges ut på det offentlige nettstedet.

Studer hoveddatoer

Studiestart (Faktiske)

1. februar 2026

Primær fullføring (Antatt)

10. mai 2027

Studiet fullført (Antatt)

30. desember 2027

Datoer for studieregistrering

Først innsendt

4. mai 2026

Først innsendt som oppfylte QC-kriteriene

4. mai 2026

Først lagt ut (Faktiske)

8. mai 2026

Oppdateringer av studieposter

Sist oppdatering lagt ut (Faktiske)

12. mai 2026

Siste oppdatering sendt inn som oppfylte QC-kriteriene

8. mai 2026

Sist bekreftet

1. mai 2026

Mer informasjon

Begreper knyttet til denne studien

Andre studie-ID-numre

  • POEM UWC 2026

Legemiddel- og utstyrsinformasjon, studiedokumenter

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-regulert medikamentprodukt

Nei

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-regulert enhetsprodukt

Nei

Denne informasjonen ble hentet direkte fra nettstedet clinicaltrials.gov uten noen endringer. Hvis du har noen forespørsler om å endre, fjerne eller oppdatere studiedetaljene dine, vennligst kontakt register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en endring er implementert på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også bli oppdatert automatisk på nettstedet vårt. .

Abonnere